Nielsen: 61-39 to Coalition

GhostWhoVotes tweets that the first post-carbon tax announcement poll from Nielsen, presumably conducted between Thursday to Saturday from a sample of 1400, has the Coalition’s lead out from 59-41 to 61-39. Further comment superfluous, but primary votes and leadership figures, and presumably also some attitudinal stuff, to follow.

UPDATE: After falling a point short of overtaking Julia Gillard in last month’s poll, Tony Abbott has rocketed to an 11-point lead as preferred prime minister, up five points to 51 per cent with Gillard down six to 40 per cent.

UPDATE 2: Labor primary vote down a point to 26 per cent …

UPDATE 3: Michelle Grattan in the Sydney Morning Herald:

In results that will send waves of fear through the government, approval for Ms Gillard’s performance has tumbled another 3 points to 34 per cent, while her disapproval rating has jumped 3 to 62 per cent. The carbon plan has been given an unequivocal thumbs down, with 56 per cent of respondents opposed to a carbon price, 52 per cent rejecting the government’s carbon price and compensation package, and 53 per cent believing it will leave them worse off. More than half (56 per cent) say Ms Gillard has no mandate for her plan, and the same proportion want an early poll before the plan is introduced. Nearly half (47 per cent) think Bob Brown and the Greens are mainly responsible for the government’s package. More than half (52 per cent) say an Abbott government should repeal the package while 43 per cent believe it should be left in place under a new government. Ms Gillard yesterday denied she had been ringing around to gauge backbench support for her failing leadership.

The Coalition’s primary vote is up 2 points to 51 per cent, while the Greens’ is down 1 point to 11 per cent. Approval of Mr Abbott has risen a point to 47 per cent. His disapproval is down 2 points to 48 per cent … Ms Gillard’s approval rating is her worst so far and the lowest for a PM since Paul Keating’s 34 per cent in March 1995.

UPDATE (18/7/2011): Essential Research is kinder for the government, showing a slight improvement from last week’s worst-ever result for them: the Coalition’s lead is down from 57-43 to 56-44, with the Coalition down a point to 49 per cent, Labor up one to 31 per cent and the Greens steady on 11 per cent. Essential being a two-week rolling average, this was half conducted immediately before and half immediately after the carbon tax announcement, with the latter evidently having provided the better figures. I have noted in the past that, for whatever reason, Essential seems to get more favourable results for the carbon tax than phone pollsters: as well as being consistent with the voting intention findings (albeit not to the extent of statistical significance), the Essential survey also finds direct support for the carbon tax has increased since the announcement, with approval up four points to 39 per cent and disapproval down four to 49 per cent.

This raises at least the possibility that the phone polling methodology behind the recent Morgan and Nielsen results, as well as next week’s Newspoll, is skewed somewhat against the carbon tax – unless of course the internet-based Essential (or perhaps some other aspect of Essential’s methodology) is skewed in its favour. It should also be noted that Essential’s recovery only returns support to the level it was at in the June 14 survey, before a dive on July 11. For all that, respondents are just as pessimistic about their own prospects under the tax as were Morgan’s: 10 per cent say they will be better off against 69 per cent worse off, and 46 per cent believe it will be bad for Australia against 34 per cent good. Further questions inquire about respondent’s self-perceived level of knowledge about the tax, and their reactions about a range of responses to it.

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

8,826 comments on “Nielsen: 61-39 to Coalition”

Comments Page 175 of 177
1 … 174 175 176 177

  2. [ShowsOn,

    What’s your thing about cute little Amanda?]
    I just like saying….
    [Amanda Shalalalalalalallalalalallalalalalalalalalalalal]

  3. Frank

    IMHO the wheels on the Coalition bandwagon have wobbled a bit this week. Not dramatically, but subtly.

    It will not make much difference, IMHO, in the short term. The shockjocks and the tabloids have been going full bore.

    ‘The Australian’ has managed not to mention Mr Turnbull’s speech, which is an utter disgrace, IMHO. But this will make them look all the more stupid when the Abbott/Turnbull boil bursts. Abbott knows the following:

    (1) Because he spent many months white-anting Mr Turnbull before stabbing him in the back Mr Turnbull owes him absolutely nothing.
    (2) If he puts Mr Turnbull on the backbench then all bets are off for Mr Turnbull. He can say what he likes.
    (3) If he leaves Mr Turnbull where he is the signals are still going to come out but they are going to me camouflaged a bit better.
    (4) This state of affairs cannot last until the election.

    Sooner or later, there is going to be a Liberal bunga bunga Party and they will not be dancing the hokey pokey.

    It will take some time but things will turn around for Labor. I am willing to predict that the next Newpoll will be around about evens at worst.

  4. It is the political battle that matters and libs have always had a very generous humanitarian position of fair, just and lenient treatment of desperate offenders, which no doubt she’ll wish to see applied to herself, in the event she is convicted.

    Utter and complete bullshit.

    Unless it is one of their own involved.

    If it a political opponent – the libs hang, draw and quarter them, the give them a *fair* trial before scattering them to the four points.

  5. [1934pc
    Posted Friday, July 22, 2011 at 4:55 pm | Permalink

    Glen

    Nevertheless Oakeshott is a sell out. He holds a conservative rural seat and he backed Labor to form government because of his hatred of the Nats.

    He backed Labor because he GOT a better deal for his ELECTORATE from Labor, Abbott failed as an negotiator, end of story!.
    BETTER DEAL, repeat until it rings in your ears!.]

    1934pc,
    Well put. I’d just add that this attitude from Glen on this issue disappoints me. I’d have thought as a tory loyalist he’d know his Burke. The values of Burke have been the hallmark of British democracy. In particular they have been very dear to the Victorian Liberals, notably Deakin and Menzies.
    I seem to recall a speech of Burke to his electors going something like this:
    [“I thank you for your confidence in me by voting for me to be your representative in Parliament. I will do my best to justify that confidence and to represent the interests of you, my constituents. You have voted for me and trusted me to act in the best interests of you and the nation. But that does not mean that I will defer to your wishes on every occasion. I am representing you but you have trusted me not only on that but to exercise my own judgment on what I think is the right and proper thing to do.”]

    Oakeshott won as an Independent standing AGAINST a National party candidate, who failed to defeat him. Not only is he under no obligation to the Nationals or Liberals, his obligations are to his constituents and to what he believes would be the national interest.

    It is about securing the best deal he can for the people of Lynne. This recent election became more complicated because he had to consider what he believed was best for the nation too.

  6. Boerwar

    I agree with your assessment. Not sure about the next poll. I am a little nervous. J6P says the anti carbon tax ads are working. Thr polls may potentially be worse

  7. Shows

    [Any lawyers around? Is “I suffer depression, therefore I steal things.” a valid legal defense?]

    She herself might have the answer to that question. According to this article she worked as a barrister before becoming a Senator.

    [She formerly worked as a barrister and specialist in industrial relations before beginning her political career and also was a senior adviser to then Industrial Relations Minister Peter Reith.]

    http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/liberal-senator-mary-jo-fisher-arrested-for-shoplifting-assault/story-e6frea83-1226100010591

  9. Also interesting about Abbott v Turnbull:

    Which way will HoJo jump?

    Will Mesma be the loyal deputy?

  10. With great respect to Senator fisher, being in the same company as her boss Abbott for any length of time would not assist her, if she is suffering from depression. He doesn’t suffer from anything except extreme hatred for Julia Gillard and desperation to get into the Lodge at any cost, regardless of the damage he is doing to this great country and those around him. He is a low life and that would not assist anyone in close proximity, who has a depression problem.

  11. Glen@8681

    because the workchoices adds worked because what they said was true

    The most effective ad with the mother and kids would never have happened in real life and she’d have cause for unfair dismissal even under Workchoices itself.

    Then you are able to provide citations or other proof ?

    Or are you telling a porky …

  12. [Fulvio Sammut
    Posted Friday, July 22, 2011 at 8:14 pm | Permalink
    The beak may not be interested in the hokey bit, but as for pokey, well …]

    Yes. The assault is by far the most serious of the two counts.

  14. In NSW the mental health act can be used so that someone so afflicted is not treated under the criminal law but instead ordered to undertake treatment program etc

  16. What’s this rumour about Rebekka and Andy Coulson? Was it at the time he was working for Cameron? Anyone know of this story?

  17. [are going to me camouflaged a bit better.
    (4) This state of affairs cannot last until the election.

    Sooner or later, there is going to be a Liberal bunga bunga Party and they will not be dancing the hokey pokey.

    It will take some time but things will turn around for Labor. I am willing to predict that the next Newpoll will be around about evens at worst.]

    thanks BW i always trust you and your friend bluey.

    victoria alwasy predicted the MT thing, he is doing abbott slowly abbott must lay awake at night wondering the next move it certainly is a chess game between those two

  18. j6p

    The smart money is in your corner.

    But look what happened to the smart money in the GFC. phht. Disappeared like CO2 would disappear into space if it really were weightless as Mr Abbott said it was.

  19. Should have added to my 8702 that mining companies will not wait until the next election before investing in increased output.

    Coal, Iron ore etc will boom in this country. Asia is on the rise, Japan will chew up minerals over the next two years as will China. Forget about the gloom and doom reports about China. It will continue to grow.

    Australia will have a very, very positive terms of trade over the next two years driven by mining and, to a lesser extent primary production.

    THe big mining companies will not sit on their bums waiting for a change of government. They will jump in while demand is huge and will continue to invest.

    Mining communities will then judge how well off they are.

  21. Anyone calling 2013 with certainty now need not be sorry or happy, they do need to be a prophet. I’m sure the scientific sample of voting and reasons for it and the reason for projecting it to the next election are very sound.

  22. [ ShowsOn
    Posted Friday, July 22, 2011 at 8:19 pm | Permalink
    She didn’t look too depressed when she danced her way into history.

    Any lawyers around? Is “I suffer depression, therefore I steal things.” a valid legal defense?]

    No.

  25. [ShowsOn

    Is “I suffer depression, therefore I steal things.” a valid legal defense?]

    Not normally, but a mental health condition falling short, say, a psychotic condition not self-induced (as, for instance taking illicit drugs) can be a mitigating factor, in that it reduces the moral culpability of the offending behaviour – see R v Verdins, R v Buckley, R v Vo [2007] VSCA 102, 23 May 2007.

  26. That Cassandra woman on Contrarians is boring. She has no facial expressions, and she talks like Niki Savva in a whiny voice.

  27. Read the Workchoices legislation.

    You’ll find that under the legislation, the situation/scenario in the ad would have constituted an unlawful termination because it disregarded the mother’s family responsibilities because she had no one to care for her children.

    Want to withdraw now Dave??

    That ad was the biggest lie of the anti-workchoices campaign….

  28. Dave at 6887″

    [The Murdoch media so called *Code of Conduct*

    1. Accuracy
    1.1 Facts must be reported impartially, accurately and with integrity.

    1.2 Clear distinction must be made between fact, conjecture and comment.

    1.3 Try always to tell all sides of the story in any kind of dispute.]

    Delicious, isn’t it?

    The Claytons Code: In place, but never followed. Ever.

  29. Joe6 pac,

    With fuel excluded from the CC package can you see any reason for the TWU to be against it ?

    Serious question.

  30. dave@8719

    Glen@8681

    because the workchoices adds worked because what they said was true

    The most effective ad with the mother and kids would never have happened in real life and she’d have cause for unfair dismissal even under Workchoices itself.

    Then you are able to provide citations or other proof ?

    Or are you telling a porky …

    So just where is your proof glen, enough of this verballing.

  31. Glen
    Posted Friday, July 22, 2011 at 8:45 pm | Permalink

    Read the Workchoices legislation.

    You’ll find that under the legislation, the situation/scenario in the ad would have constituted an unlawful termination because it disregarded the mother’s family responsibilities because she had no one to care for her children.

    Just prove your statement!

    Or withdraw.

  32. [feeney
    Posted Friday, July 22, 2011 at 8:41 pm | Permalink

    What’s this rumour about Rebekka and Andy Coulson? Was it at the time he was working for Cameron? Anyone know of this story?]

    feeney whats the background to the rumor? I’m interested to learn where it originated, nothing is beyond reality in this saga.

  33. [8732

    david

    Posted Friday, July 22, 2011 at 8:43 pm | Permalink

    And the TWU members will be all for the return of Workchoices then under an anti worker lib Govt?
    ]

    As the CFMEU found out in 2004 after giving Howard a Hero’s Welcome in Tasmania.

  34. [That Cassandra woman on Contrarians is boring. She has no facial expressions, and she talks like Niki Savva in a whiny voice.]
    Cassandra Wilkinson? She’s great.

  35. Why not invoke the old automatism defence, Charlton. That’s a goer if you couple it to the Hokey Pokey in the Senate clip.

    Res ipsa loquitor.

  37. [So just where is your proof glen, enough of this verballing.]

    I’m telling you read the legislation. You’ll find it was an unlawful termination.

    So withdraw!

  39. [8733 charlton
    Posted Friday, July 22, 2011 at 8:44 pm | Permalink
    ShowsOn

    Is “I suffer depression, therefore I steal things.” a valid legal defense?

    Not normally, but a mental health condition falling short, say, a psychotic condition not self-induced (as, for instance taking illicit drugs) can be a mitigating factor, in that it reduces the moral culpability of the offending behaviour – see R v Verdins, R v Buckley, R v Vo [2007] VSCA 102, 23 May 2007.]

    Relevant to sentencing only.

    Let’s face it, if the charges are found proven then she’s on a hiding to nothing for a bond on the ‘lifting charge (provided she has no priors, which I assume she hasn’t). It’s the assault I’d be worried about.

  40. Glen@8745

    So just where is your proof glen, enough of this verballing.

    I’m telling you read the legislation. You’ll find it was an unlawful termination.

    So withdraw!

    You made the allegation and have yet again failed to substantiate it.

    Slippery with the truth yet again.

  41. [Boerwar @ 8664:

    I do remind Laboratarians that the Ms Dallas Hayden was in strife for much same thing (sans the alleged biffo) and that shoplifting can, at times, be a sign of mental ill-health.]

    Your point is very valid.

    I remember reading of a judge’s wife in England some year ago now who made shop-lifting an art-form, yet she was not short a of pound.

    Her way of handling her depression was to shop-list to give some excitement to her life. Her husband apparently was more interested in the law than her.

    And there are many other examples I could cite.

  42. [That ad was the biggest lie of the anti-workchoices campaign….]

    You haven’t established it is a lie at all yet, you haven’t detailed the scenario, you haven’t pointed out where in the legislation you are so keen for other to read she was protected … you haven’t established there were other lies …

    really really pathetic.

  43. Frank Calabrese

    [As the CFMEU found out in 2004 after giving Howard a Hero’s Welcome in Tasmania]

    Then again as a “back in the day” card carrying BLF member I do remember that our union called them the “Can’t Fecking Make Em work Union”.

  44. [8743 Fulvio Sammut
    Posted Friday, July 22, 2011 at 8:50 pm | Permalink
    Why not invoke the old automatism defence, Charlton. That’s a goer if you couple it to the Hokey Pokey in the Senate clip.

    Res ipsa loquitor.]

    To quote Frank….words fail me.

  45. WeWantPaul@8750

    That ad was the biggest lie of the anti-workchoices campaign….

    You haven’t established it is a lie at all yet, you haven’t detailed the scenario, you haven’t pointed out where in the legislation you are so keen for other to read she was protected … you haven’t established there were other lies …

    really really pathetic.

    As usual, glen failure to produce proof is his admission of not telling the truth.

    Withdraw !

  46. Are you seriously comparing a politicians wife to a politician to suggest somehow a hypothetical member of parliament could shoplift if hypothetically they were depressed?

    I guess with how ‘fit for office’ Abbott is everyone is fit for office.

  49. [Dave the evidence is clear…not even the others in the PB Labortariat are calling me a liar on this one because it’s true…the ad was disingenuous…it would have been unlawful dismissal…]
    We are just bored with your nonsense.

    It doesn’t mean it isn’t nonsense.

  50. This continued, having to call glen on his problem with the truth is appalling…it is indeed the Abbott syndrome, simple appalling, off with his head!!!

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 175 of 177
1 … 174 175 176 177